There has to be third party video of exodus' reaction at first meeting. I'm in for 100.

Brent

Some other things to consider. With larger main tires and soft surfaces, the relatively small tailwheel sinks down slightly and creates a lot of drag in the 3-point position during takeoff. The sooner you get it off the ground, the faster you will accelerate. Someone else observed that this also keeps the tailwheel from getting beaten up, snagging on something or bumping the tail into the air over ruts. The latter can be a problem since it alters your angle of attack and lift. That's why I like to get the tailwheel off the ground as soon as possible on soft and rough surfaces.

Forward yoke during the takeoff roll will create some elevator drag but it will also lift the tailwheel off the ground sooner. You can apply and remove some forward yoke during the takeoff roll to find out when the tail is ready to lift. I find that a tail-low takeoff with the tail just off the ground works well in my Maule MX-7-180. Keeping a slightly nose-up attitude gives me a positive angle of attack that creates more lift. I hold in the flap handle button and adjust the flaps between 24 and 40 degrees while observing the climbout visually with an occasional glance at the airspeed indicator. If the airspeed drops too much, then adjust pitch and flaps simultaneously.

If there's a crosswind, then aileron and rudder control are needed to keep the direction of travel straight. Maybe even a single wheel takeoff on the upwind main wheel until enough airspeed is achieved to counteract sideways drift.

My take on wheel vs 3 point for control. I learned my tail dragging whilst "working" down in Honduras during the 80's. When I got my first 185, which was also my first taildragger, an exiled Nicaraguan Air Force pilot volunteered to teach me, "El Perro Negro." He had an ungodly amount of 185 bush flying time, over 10,000 hours. There was no such thing as a decent strip down there, all being rutted, vaguely oriented into the wind and muddy and rocky. There was a fairly large unfriendly aspect to some of the fields, so in and out quick was the rule.

Since I was such a horrid tail dragging innate. He taught me to do wheel landings for almost everything. He said you have more control, especially in crosswinds, taking off and landing. Save 3 points for soft fields and only practice them on dirt and grass or it will waste your tires. The 185 had Robertson STOL so it was kind of an elevator. No matter what the conditions where, you only had to deal with them for 200-300'. We did use the flaps to spot land, getting just over the spot and gently lowering the flaps to more or less lower us to the ground. Still used flaps on takeoff, but could pull them to make little hops over holes or big rocks, never holding it for long. Flaps with a Johnson bar is kind of another flight control.

This may not cross over directly to a Maule, as the 185 has a huge rudder. They made it huge, due to the embarrassment for the undersized one on the Birddog. When the Marines speced their own version of the Dog, the O-1C, it was the intro of the 180/185 tail for more low and on the ground rudder. Ultimately didn't help the Marines much, they wrecked 49 of the 51 O-1C's. Only 2 survive, one in the Marine Corps museum and one in private hands a friend of mine is trying to buy. In their defense, the Marines are not totally to blame for the high wreckage rate for the O-1C, it had a particularly shitty engine, a SUPERCHARGED 470! Unreliable did not begin to describe it.

On a good strip in Honduras:

To wind or not to wind

“We do get gusty crosswinds, about 45-60 degrees, 15-20 knots. Certainly not extreme by real backcountry standards.”

I cannot speak for the long time commercial fellows who were or are still paid to fly where and when told to do so. But, from my backcountry lessons from a couple of fairly old timers, in their sixties and eighties, “Any wind that is not aligned with the strip is too much wind.” The best wind is no wind down in the bottom of a canyon, that way you pretty much eliminate the need to decide between two wheels or three. The best wind is no wind down in the bottom of a canyon, that way you pretty much eliminate the need to decide between two wheels or three. Someone gave me a copy of the history of aviation in Idaho that goes back at least to the thirties wherein they all say, "go early before the wind picks up." Now up on the relatively open Tundra or in isolated southern Oregon may be a bit different.

Trim

Hi Ez,

I know you are an icon here and have a stake in aviation. You are respectful and provide good clear thinking which I can understand. You are gifted and I respect that... will try to explain my limited insight into tailwheel operations.

Summary for me... using a tail wheel for control on bouncing, gusting, shearing, raining etcetera ... take offs and landings makes me feel completely out control ( like maybe running off the runway). Wheel landings and take offs in the above stated conditions gives me more control. I did try 3pts in foul bouncy conditions and almost ate it, for me never again!

One note: I like (love) the flat chromoly tail...you can blast the "f..." Out of it with rocks for years bring the tail up! Just change the leading edge tape each 100 hours!

Okay just my opinion I fly a Taylorcraft With flaps and 118 hp And do wheel landings as well as three Point on a regular basis .
I do not see how anyone can say you have more control when your tailwheel is off the ground Granted you have the propeller slipstream over the rudder etc But when my airplane is sitting on the ground three-point it no longer has any lift it has the weight of the tail against the tailwheel plus the tailwheel is steerable plus I still have full rudder authority With the occasional propeller blast when I need it I would say if you feel out of control in the three point position my guess is you probably have tailwheel issues

Have plenty read the posts.

Well jeez... where do I start...

An icon, huh? I know of at least three or four people on this board who were likely vomiting up their Prozac pills when they read that. Thanks

(I'm nothing other than an airport bum in reality. If we met, you would be disappointed on an "icon" level almost as much as exodus would be horrified on a visual level)

Speaking of exodus' tragic (and eye-damaging) disappointment, sorry dude, but the original blonde in those photos is neither available nor affordable. The new "better faster younger higher horsepower" blonde in my video is available, but I'm afraid you would be roadkill in about ten minutes.

My question about the 3 point attitude was not a challenge as much as a desire to understand if or where my previous assumptions were incorrect. I have very little PIC time in the Scout (but several hours flying behind them on the end of a rope).

dogpilot wrote:

I learned my tail dragging whilst "working" down in Honduras during the 80's.

There was a fairly large unfriendly aspect to some of the fields,

You probably met my friend and fellow BCP member 182 STOL Driver. He "worked" there too, delivering Bibles to the natives for an outfit named Texas Christian Bible School. He kindly explained to me one day that the ministry preferred to make those Bible deliveries by Air Mail... in an olive drab Huey.

If a headwind sheared to a tailwind (or zero knots, or > -10 kts relative net change), I would get the tail down ASAP, and retract flaps upon positive landing surface contact. But, still "flying the airplane", the best I could, exploiting aerodynamics even with tail wheel in contact with landing surface.

I agree that the tail wheel is going to be on the ground after or before a certain airspeed (generally). And it is good to make use of it.

My limited ski flying experience tells me to GET TAIL SKI UP AND OUT OF THE SNOW FAST or I might even NOT takeoff and have to abort takeoff (in powder snow ops, not ice or packed)!

We seem to have shifted from short takeoff to other issues so I will join in here.
I have tried to takeoff with short brush/tall grass and it makes for a complete oddball technique. I could accelerate up to twenty five mph or so just fine then could feel the brush actually wrapping around the axle shafts and dragging me back. In order to gain more speed I had to Pop the flaps and jerk the yoke back to "jump" the plane off the ground. This speed is too slow to fly but each hop would gain maybe five mph more. Four or five hops and we could stay in the air in ground affect to build speed and then fly away. I am sure it looked pretty silly for my chubby little plane to go down the road like a grasshopper but it worked. One word of caution, had the brush gotten taller or thicker it might hook the mains hard enough to stand you right on your nose. The strip I was using had one season's growth of alder on it, fairly sparse and about 16" tall.
Question, would bigger tires have been better in this case or worse?

Wheesl for brush, dirt, grass, etc. etc. BIGGER the BETTER! Opinion.

It sounds like bigger wheels and tires would have been better than a taller landing gear, because the axles are higher off the ground and that was your failure mode.

But I have never been in that situation, so take it with a grain of salt.

Sounds like strong streamlined fairings or cutting blades in front of the axles might have helped too.

Heck, maybe there is good room for "Fishnet Cutter" STC, like on boat propeller shafts? Just adapt for Cleveland Wheels.

Or a folding law mower for gardening before takeoff!

I will think twice before high grass ops after that post! Definitely "hairy" story! Thanks!

Because crop dusters work with heavy loads and often at high density altitude, the basic low ground effect takeoff is used for normal, short, soft, tall grass, rocky, or any takeoff. The airplane was designed to fly, not to drive on the ground. It accelerates much faster when not trying to climb at the same time so we get the tail wheel off and the airplane leveled as soon as possible. The friction of the mains is greater than the drag of flaps, if we have them, or a higher pitch attitude to get the mains off as soon as possible. The most important teaching point, however, is to dynamically and proactively (as with the rudder) wiggle the stick fore/aft to stay in as low a ground effect as the rocks, river, or grass allow. Six inch ground effect is most effective. The book will say 10-20% extra energy from ground effect. They are using 15' not six inches. The hover boat boys say 40%. Anyway, when loaded at high density altitude (spraying around Durango and Alamosa etc.) 15' is not going to make it. We're just going to sink back down. Behind the power curve is fine for a bit, we need the kinetic energy of pressure airspeed. That airspeed can be converted to altitude in the zoom up at the obstacle. More than three ten feet over the obstacle is too much. We are wasting the kinetic energy of airspeed we need for maneuverability. Just remember the level the aircraft over the obstruction. Again, with a downdraft, we may want to maneuver around terrain and obstacles. We do this in ground effect with rudder turn (using aileron only to keep the wing level) when possible. Under wires is often safer than over. Vx becomes Vy around 8,000' density altitude and is never sustainable with low power to weight airplanes.

In the mountains we never take off without considering which way is down hill and how we might get there in ground effect if necessary.

Power corrupts. If we are training students in an airplane with lots of excess engine thrust for climb, we are not training our student to fly the wing. Most 65-150 hp airplanes do not have lots of excess engine thrust for climb. A loaded Pawnee does not have excess engine thrust for climb. A loaded C-180 does not have lots of excess engine thrust for climb at high density altitude. Without excessive power to weight ratios, we have to look to God's energy in the mountains: ground effect, potential gravity thrust of altitude, flying fast through downdrafts and slow through updrafts, energy management (no load factor) turns, orographic or ridge lift, etc. Wind energy help comes in the afternoon with the high diurnal rate. Little airplanes can't make it over the high passes in the morning when it is cool and calm. Got to use wind energy in the high density altitude afternoon. Just the way it is.

EZFlap wrote:

dogpilot wrote:

I learned my tail dragging whilst "working" down in Honduras during the 80's.

There was a fairly large unfriendly aspect to some of the fields,

You probably met my friend and fellow BCP member 182 STOL Driver. He "worked" there too, delivering Bibles to the natives for an outfit named Texas Christian Bible School. He kindly explained to me one day that the ministry preferred to make those Bible deliveries by Air Mail... in an olive drab Huey.

Eastern Honduras near Nicaraguan border -the "Contra air force " in mid 80's. 4-6 Helicopters with Texas Christan school logos on side ,3 or so C123's ,several Dc-3's , some DH-7's -4 Maules and a couple of Aero Commanders 500's. Panama registrations .On one of our "delivering bibles " missions saw a stinger missile shoot down a Hind helicopter at about 1/4 mile .

On the subject of the short take off technique -182 with manual flaps (thanks EZflap) to get out of PZ. I've got a dvd video of my old 182 in less than 150 foot ground roll at 5500 Density Altitude with about 200 lbs under gross -10 megs if you want one to [email protected] with SPORTSMAN STOL ,LRI- EZFlap control ,
Big gear and brakes .

7 Maules actually though one was wrecked. (later rebuilt).

Contactflying, recently read your book. Lots of good stuff, thanks

maules.com wrote:7 Maules actually though one was wrecked. (later rebuilt).

.

Supplied by U.S. counsel for World Freedom and Coors .